Is this Processor and Motherboard compatible?

Hi, recently been looking for a new Processor and a Motherboard which has more than 2 slots for RAM (current 1 only has 2 slots ¬_¬).

And I've found;

AMD (San Diego) Athlon 64bit 4000+ 939pin 1mb L2cache Retail Boxed Processor With 3 Year Warranty and Fan Included
£233.54 inc VAT

Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe S939 NF4 SLI ATX - Sound 2xgln 1394 USB2 SATA
£99.81 inc VAT

Now I just need to make sure if there compatible with each other, although I'm quite sure they are, I need some more opinions.



Thanks,
Josh

YES.. dam good combo, though Instead of the 4000 i would get an X2


EDIT - bearing in mind this motherboard has 2 PCI Express, so you would need to buy a new graphics card if you only have an AGP card

This?

Although I don't think I need a Dual-Core processor, as they are actually running at 2.2 clock speed and 2 512kb cache, if I just buy a single-core (4000+), it clock speeds at 2.4ghz and 1mb cache...

Although I'm not sure how dual-core processors work nowadays, if you wish to correct me in how the dual is better than single. O_o

[EDIT]
It's PCI Express? I only just got a new ATI Sapphire Radeon 9600 pro advantage AGP ;\ Wanna recommend me (from eBuyer) any motherboards that are AGP?

AGP is kinda on its way out. Most newer motherboards are PCI Express x16 for video. I'll do some checking around and see if there are some good ones that still use AGP -- you might have to settle for an older model.

As far as going X2, it's up to you. For the money you could get a better gaming processor for today's games by going single-core. Dual-core is good for multi-tasking CPU-hungry applications (like playing GW, burning a CD, and folding at the same time, etc.) The future of multi-threaded games on PCs is questionable. I can almost guarantee you won't see any (maybe 1 or 2 oddities) over the next year or two. Multi-threaded apps are more expensive to develop, so there would almost have to be a demand for multi-threaded games for the companies to want to do it. Besides, most people's systems are GPU-limited in newer games anyway. They would have to specially design a game to use a ton of CPU (physics, AI, etc.) to make it worthwhile.

Also check out some reviews of the Asus A8N. The concensus is that it's not the greatest board in the world, but mileage may vary I suppose. Asus is a good mobo maker, but their nForce4 boards have not been particularly well-received. If you want to go nForce4 SLI I would recommend the offerings from DFI (the LANParty series) or EPoX (yes, EPoX). I went with the EPoX EP-9NPA+SLI because it's a lot cheaper, and it's been one of the better boards I've owned so far.

By the way, be careful about using more than 2 RAM modules in an Athlon64 system. The Athlon64 memory controller (which is the same regardless of the mobo as it is on the CPU) is picky about memory modules. All of the modules you use must be exactly the same, which can even be a problem with the same model of module from the same company. Companies that make memory will sometimes make a new revision of the same module with different chips on it. You need to use the same model and revision of the module across the board (pun intended) to have a stable system. Athlon64s also do not particularly like more than 2 modules per system. Most mobo makers will recommend increasing the CAS latency setting by 1 (ex., from 2 to 3) and lowering the memory clockspeed from DDR400 (200) to DDR333 (166). Basically, when you use more than 2 modules you usually (but not always) need to run your memory at slower speeds. You're going to get the best performance and stability using 2 module as a general rule (but there are exceptions).

I'll post back here with some AGP mobo suggestions...

Here is a nice AGP motherboard.

http://www.ebuyer.com/customer/produ...duct_uid=66708

When you buy new RAM I suggest getting a 2 stick kit, this ensures they are identicle to each other. If you are going to fill up all 4 just buy the same kit twice.

How bout this motherboard:
Asus A8V Deluxe Socket-939 VIA/KT800Pro
http://www.ebuyer.com/customer/produ...duct_uid=72725
In case you like ASUS MoBo.

There really is no benefit of running a dual core system as a gaming machine if all your doing is playing the game. The games that are currently available are written to use only 1 CPU, there are the few exceptions out there though but GW is not one of them. Although if you like to do other things while playing such as ripping a DVD or compiling something then it is a GREAT thing to have. The dual cores will distribute the load for you allowing you to game without a hitch. You can look at it this way, if you are going to replace the system in 2 years then get the single core, if you are going to keep it for longer then 2 years then get the dual core. BTW the 4000+ you are looking at can be had for cheaper using the 3700+ instead. Just use arctic silver thermal compound on the heatsink/fan and overclock it.

Looks nice and what I'm looking for, so I just need to make sure there dual-channel DDR 400/333/266.

So would it do if I ordered this set twice?:
http://www.ebuyer.com/customer/produ...duct_uid=49296

And Pegasus, I'm not a man of over-clocking, just don't like it, risky and lessens its life span

NO Don't say that, that's the funnest thing about computing. That's what the 3 year warranty is for...lol.

Lol, yeah but that's just...I can't be assed to mess around with warranty and sending it back ;\ Lol.

Hmmm, so I know it is newegg, but this is waht I am buying for my new computer rig:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813128307

Then I am using dual channel 2 gigs of ram, and ATI RADEON 9550 AGP card. It should run BF2.

I am not sure if I should buy the X2 4200+ now, or buy an amd athlon 64 now, and upgrade to the Quad Core processor which is set to come out 1-2 years from now. Opinions? i mean, I like doing stuff like running Norton Antivirus scans, and like Xfire, or AIM, but is that enough to really warrant the dual core?

...Don't you kinda like need your own topic for that?

And don't NewEgg only do USA deliveries? So it's no use to me.

My set up

Athlon 64 3200+

A8N-SLI Deluxe 939 socket.

Same mobo, etc. With DDR400 2gb RAM and it runs pretty well for my first time building it..

Runs F.E.A.R. / Guildwars on the highest settings with no problem at all.

If you end up with an A8N make sure you install the drivers from their site for audio.. =P I've been tickering around with it for ever (before the installment of the driver) to get fix some audio bugs.

Also the board keeps pretty cool. The whole (need same modle RAM if you want to add more later and the same exact same v-card if you want SLI Like our intelligent Dex has said earlier is a pain down the road.)

The whole dual processor is a hype thing... doesn't do more for games only if you do mutiple things at once (Like Dex said) so... if you're going to play a game burn a cd, play a media player, cook some popcorn and some how make it cook chicken then go ahead. =P

But if you are simple (like I) then just get 3200+ and up with the singleness.

Hmm, other posters are saying leave the dual core for the time being, However the windows OS utilises it very very well, it splits the running processes between the 2 cores making it faster and more responsive, so I still stand by what I first said get an X2, it'll save you getting one done the line

I use an x2 on my machine and I've found that when I open the performance manager, the two cores are ticking along nicely, sharing the load for GW. How much of this sharing is GW on one core and the OS on another, I don't know and nor do I care.

I'm just happy to be able to have my browser, imageready, vent, rip a dvd, and a terminal window open while I run GW.

I'm not saying don't get one. In fact, I just got one last week. I'm just trying to clear up the misconception that dual-core will make your games run faster. See, things like games will get primary processing priority when they have the focus, so while you're playing a game (which as of right now is generally not using 2 cores) Windows gives the game 90-100% of your CPU time. If you have something running in the background that will specifically request a higher processing priority then Windows might give your game less CPU time, and then dual-core is doing some good for you because it will shift execution of the other app requesting more CPU time to the other core.

Personally, I perform a lot of 'serious' tasks with my PC, so it's worthwhile for me to use dual-core so I can go do some farming to kill time while I'm waiting for a big set of DLLs I've written to compile. For a typical user, you're little background applications are just going to go into a wait state while you're playing a game -- using very little CPU time. In that case, a typical user will get more "bang-for-the-buck" by using a single-core CPU with a higher clockspeed.

While playing Guild Wars, I tend to have;

- Guild Wars
- Winamp (Music)
- About 8 or so Webpages open with Mozilla
- A few MSN Conversations
- Adobe Photoshop & ImageReady

^^ So...should I get a Dual-Core? o_O

If so, would this do?;

http://www.ebuyer.com/customer/produ...duct_uid=91328

A VERY BIG YES, with the above open even the highest clocked single core would struggle a little, The X2 wont have any if little impact on any games just yet, but with more than one program open the X2 will handle it

you OC it and it fries you send it in and they check the neat little clock monitor circuit (you didnt know they can check?)

void warrenty sorry but we can sell you a replacement

OC is for bragging only as they are plenty fast as they are.

of course way back in the dx days it could make the difference for me between a barely playable 9 frames/sec to a decent 14 frames/sec

Ok, so over-all, buying this all good?:

Abit AV8-3RD Eye Skt 939 K8t800pro 8xAGP ATX Gigabit LAN, SATA150 RAID, IEEE1394, 6ch Audio, ìGuru USB2.0 Retail Box
£63.63 inc VAT


Kingston 1GB DDR PC3200 400MHz Non-ECC CL3 (3-3-3) 184pin DIMM's (Kit of 2 x 512mb)
£101.95 inc VAT (for 2 sets)
(get 2 sets of these, so 2GB)

AMD Athlon 64 (ADA4200BVBOX) X2 4200+ socket 939 Dual Core 2.2ghz 512kb and 512kb Cache
£280.63 inc VAT

"VERY BIG"? I had more than that open while playing GW with my older Athlon64 3000+ Newcastle (yes, single-core and Socket 754 single channel) and it never missed a beat because I had 1.5GB RAM. Guys, having things OPEN is going to cause RAM issues. Have things open that are actively using CPU cycles will potentially cause CPU issues. Given the applications you listed (and the fact that they will most likely be static while GW has the focus) I would say that you should be more concerned about having plenty of RAM to prevent excessive pagefile swapping (which makes your system run VERY slow) than having 2 CPU cores. But what do I know? I'm just an experienced and educated professional computer engineer. Why listen to me?

Look, do what you want. If you want to spend the $200 on a second core go ahead. I'm probably going to get flamed for this, but it comes down to this: if you're not sure whether or not you need a dual-core CPU YOU PROBABLY DON'T!!! For the typical user it won't be necessary to have an SMP-enabled machine anytime soon. Heavy multi-taskers (not just having multiple things open, but multiple things open that are cranking on something) will benefit, and people who do a lot of engineering and media (video -- audio is nothing) encoding will benefit. Most gamers will not. Then again, if you just want to make sure you're future-proof and it's worth the extra $200 to do so, then why not? It's your $200.

The thing is, for the price of the X2 you could get an FX-series CPU that would actually run your games faster...

Josh, don't worry, I am not stealing your thread, and in fact, I gave it a bump by posting!

I know newegg is no good to you, but hte items that I linked to are.

AND GO FOR THE X2, although intel has announced they are coming out with a new socket and a quad core processor, where is the need for that? and it iwll be expensive.

X2 Dual Core = £280.51

And the cheapest FX I can find is

AMD Athlon 64 FX55 1MB L2Cache 939pin Retail Boxed Processor With 3 Year Warranty and Fan Included
£523

And isn't 2GB RAM with a Dual-Core enough..?

Yes, where is the need indeed...

Actually, AMD made their quad-core intentions known first.

I guess I'm done trying to help people with hardware on these forums. Everyone who's built a couple of systems thinks they're a freakin' expert. I'm not bitter...

Yes yes, everyone must have dual-core! Multi-threaded e-mail software is right around the corner, and your X2 4800+ will totally PWN it!!! Gotta go strap rocket boosters to my bicycle now! Cheers!


BTW - 2GB is a good amount of RAM. Also, the 64-bit FX CPUs are still a bit expensive, so that wasn't a good comparison. Hmmm...I wonder why someone would pay that much for a single-core CPU since dual-core PWNs all.....?

Don't worry Dex I appreciate your help on the forums. =)

I'm far from an expert because I built only one compy. I just know how to put one together what goes together.. not hard at all.. It's troubleshooting the bios, etc.

OK, maybe "VERY BIG" was an over exaggeration, the point I was getting at was future proofing. By the way where can you get you fx's at 280 english pounds(X2 4200), because I want one.
Also sorry but what's with the I'm an Engineer and a computer professional "so I know what i'm talking about", there is most possibly a few more than you on these forums, i'm not flaming you, or being derogitory, but other people do know what they're talking about, me included.

Yeah, sorry for my attitude. I get annoyed perhaps too easily because I've spent my whole life (practically the past 20 years) studying hardware and software -- intently. I'm paid to be the senior architect for a rather large team of software developers, so planning hardware/software interaction, software architecture and structure, and the future of software implementations on future hardware are kind of my specialty. I've been everywhere from PC hardware tech to structural software theory in the IT and app dev world over the past 10 years. Maybe I'm a bit over-worked. I guess I'm a bit quick to argue because every time I start posting on forums like this I end up in an argument with people who have built a system or two and think that makes them a CE expert. I used to try to be nice about it, but over time it gets difficult when you end up getting flamed by people who are hobbyist computer "gurus" and you've spent 8-20 hours a day for your entire life learning the ins and outs of something. I mean, I wouldn't argue with people about something that I wasn't so sure about that it was second nature to me. I'm simply not that brave!

Anyway, sorry for the 'tude. I'll tone it down and get back to the reason I joined this forum -- to help folks. Maybe someone who knows about something I don't (cars, for example) will help me back someday...

I'm not arguing with you at all, if your aiming that at me, rofl. Never built a PC, but I know how to put parts in and out. ;S

Nah. Replying to cannonfodder, and referring to people in disc. threads from all over the place -- nobody in particular. Sorry to muck up your thread, m8!

Nah, Dex I'm sorry dude, got up on the wrong side of bed I think

Josh, good luck with whatever you decide to buy, i'm sure everyone here will help you out